The following is excerpted from “The Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy” published by Vision Forum Ministries.
…..
Central to the crisis of this era is the systematic attack on the timeless truths of biblical patriarchy. This attack includes the movement to subvert the biblical model of the family, and redefine the very meaning of fatherhood and motherhood, masculinity, femininity, and the parent and child relationship. We emphasize the importance of biblical patriarchy, not because it is greater than other doctrines, but because it is being actively attacked by unbelievers and professing Christians alike. Egalitarian feminism is a false ideology that has bred false doctrine in the church and seduced many believers. In conscious opposition to feminism, egalitarianism, and the humanistic philosophies of the present time, the church should proclaim the Gospel centered doctrine of biblical patriarchy as an essential element of God’s ordained pattern for human relationships and institutions.
…..
God as Masculine
1. God reveals Himself as masculine, not feminine. God is the eternal Father and the eternal Son, the Holy Spirit is also addressed as “He,” and Jesus Christ is a male. (Matt. 1:25; 28:19; Jn. 5:19; 16:13)
The Image of God and Gender Roles
2. Both man and woman are made in God’s image (their human characteristics enable them to reflect His character) and they are both called to exercise dominion over the earth. They share an equal worth as persons before God in creation and redemption. The man is also the image and glory of God in terms of authority, while the woman is the glory of man. (Gen. 1:27-28; 1 Cor. 11:3,7; Eph. 5:28; 1 Pet. 3:7)
3. God ordained distinct gender roles for man and woman as part of the created order. Adam’s headship over Eve was established at the beginning, before sin entered the world. (Gen. 2:18ff.; 3:9; 1 Cor. 11:3,7; 1 Tim. 2:12-13)
4. Although sin has distorted their relationship, God’s order of authority for husbands and wives has not changed, and redemption enables them to make substantial progress in achieving God’s ideal for their relationship. (Gen. 3:16; Eph. 5:22ff.)
Read more from Vision Forum Ministries
Hello, Daniel. I’ve enjoyed your blog and finally got to visit your personal page. Upon coming to your page, I was interested in the passages of Scripture you posted regarding male headship: “Adam’s headship over Eve was established at the beginning, before sin entered the world.” (Gen. 2:18ff.; 3:9; 1 Cor. 11:3,7; 1 Tim. 2:12-13).
More seriously, note that Paul says “I do not suffer.” In other passages, Paul differentiates between things that he says and those things the Lords says (see 1Cor.7:6, 25; 2Cor.8:8; 11:17).
Gen.3:9 is already after sin.
Gen.2:18ff is interesting because Adam’s helper was to be a “helper comparable to him.” Do you see that as implying superiority prelapsarianly? And then Adam proclaims that the man shall “leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife.” It seems like it was the man who had to do the moving and accommodating, at least prior to sin.
If we follow the creation narrative, God started with a messy chaos and kept building up to more complex organisms, ending with Eve. Paul (appealing to rabbinical logic) says, as you stated, that Adam was created first (1Tim.2:13). I remember a woman telling me that if one were to follow that logic, the gorilla was created before Adam!
I agree (though not heartily) that there is a headship role for men after sin, but it was not the original plan. In any case, the NT level of responsibility is now enormous; even larger than before the entrance of sin on account of the new paradigm of Christ’s husbandship: Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her (Eph.5:25-33). I think this is the most credibly redemptive way to approach husband headship. Jesus’ love for the church is, as great understatements go, a tough act to follow for any man! Might it not be that this new husband SOP of Christ’s sacrificial love requires a vast amount of humility when it comes to affirming (not to mention practicing) husband headship?
Grace and Peace.
—Luis
Luis, thanks for your comment. First, note that the item above is a quote from someone else's statement. I didn't write it, though I do agree with it wholeheartedly.r nYes, Genesis 3:9 is after the couple had committed sin. However, it shows that God came to talk to Adam as the head of the marriage, not to Eve. When the Lord questioned the couple about their sin, he first addressed the man. The implication here is that the man is the head, the one ultimately responsible for actions the couple takes together. This passage is evidence of the plan that God already had in place, even before the first couple was expelled from Eden.r nYes, Genesis 2:18 speaks to the headship of man. Man was created first, as you note, and woman was created to be his helper. Yes, man leaves his parents to be joined with his wife; likewise, the wife leaves her parents to be joined to her husband. Both are leaving behind their previous lives to build a life united in marriage. It is wholly within the keeping of biblical patriarchy that the man should leave his parents to care for and provide for his wife. In fact, this is a critical point of patriarchy, that the man provides for his family.r nI note your humor, but want to make a point about the created order. Yes, the gorilla was made before Adam. But only humans were made in God's image. Therefore, to appeal to earlier creatures as superior to Adam is to deny the unique imprint of God upon the minds and nature of mankind. To my knowledge, no one has ever abused the Scriptures so viciously as to seriously suggest that man should be subject to the animals (though I wouldn't be surprised by such an idea being put forward these days) because the Scriptures are so clear about the value and dignity of mankind–because the Lord made only mankind with that dignity.r nThe New Testament principles to which you refer are addressed in the remainder of the above quoted document (follow the link). Biblical patriarchy doesn't dismiss the New Testament. Instead, it follows the sound interpretive principle of joining the precepts of the Old Testament with the New in understanding the Lord's Creation and his established order. We can have no concept of the Lord's love for the church if we do not understand how man's sin destroyed his good relationship with God at Eden.
You know, Daniel, FYI, it isn't immediately obvious that your blog here is a series of quotes from another document. The omission of quotes and/or citation information led me to believe this is your material. However, that is not really important because, as you said, you agree with the material "wholeheartedly."r n r nThough I agree that presently there is husband headship in the home (though societal patriarchy is neither necessary nor implicit in any text), I have simply stated that the NT husband paradigm exceeds even that presented previous to the cross. I agree that the NT includes the OT, and necessarily so. But no example is greater than God's love, and the greatest example of that love was not available until Christ's life, death, resurrection, ascension, intercession, and promise to return for us.r n r nThere are two problems with patriarchy as commonly understood. First, it would be the easiest thing in the world for me to agree eagerly with patriarchy because, after all, I'm a man. The second problem is related to the first: I'm a man, a sinful man. I share this nature problem with you and all other men on this planet. It is knowledge of this sinful nature that must temper the practice of patriarchal leadership. History is not just evidence but proof that we as men have been stellar in making a claim of leadership preeminence with physical force rather than with the spiritual power described in Eph.5. Most unfortunate is the fact that Christian men have asserted their claims to superiority with a worldly, vicious spirit rather than with the Spirit of Christ. Our sinful nature turns biblical patriarchy for the home into forceful domination at home and in society rather than the servant leadership of Christ, abuse rather than protection, arrogance rather than humility.r n r nI've been married 25 years and have two young adult daughters. They have learned that male leadership never means abuse; and that abuse (verbal or physical) is not to be tolerated under any circumstances. And that goes both ways in a marriage.r n r nIn theory, patriarchy sounds nice. It's the practice that has been problematic for nearly 6,000 years.